Customer Discussions > Science forum

was the moon landing real or fake, and why?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 126-150 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 30, 2010 9:26:41 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 2, 2010 9:01:49 AM PST
iruri says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Nov 30, 2010 9:44:58 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 30, 2010 10:03:00 PM PST
@ iruri -

"Sorry, but you have NUTIN."

So, it appears that you're going to use the excuse that I wasn't sufficiently nice to you (someone who is a thoroughly dishonest and disingenuous prick in every post) to do what you were doing anyway and would have done if I called you "sir" and kissed your a$$:

You DISHONESTLY refuse to acknowledge that Ryan had "NUTIN".

You DISHONESTLY refuse to acknowledge that you failed to grasp that Ryan's "NUTIN" was "NUTIN".

You DISHONESTLY refuse to acknowledge that some of Ryan's "NUTIN" was worse than "NUTIN" because it was absolutely, 100%, undeniably, wrong and ignorantly so.

You DISHONESTLY refuse to answer the questions that you asked me to post.

I just presented a lot more than "NUTIN" and your dismissal of it as such is thoroughly DISHONEST.

That is THE #1 trait of a CT'ist - intellectual dishonesty. When the intellectually dishonest are presented with the enough truth, and they continue to arguing for the unsupportable anyway, they have no choice but to segue from intellectual dishonesty to just plain dishonesty and then to bald-faced lying and transparent denialism. You've been there for months.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 30, 2010 10:21:14 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 1, 2010 11:35:38 AM PST
iruri says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 30, 2010 10:24:44 PM PST
Ryan, the penny thing is a physical impossibility on multiple grounds. Atmospheric distortion is the most obvious one, but those in the know know that there are adaptive corrective mechanisms that can partially correct for it. However, there is no way that they could ever correct to that degree. There is also the matter of the lack of transparency of the atmosphere at that resolution. Any useful wavelength for this purpose is subject to interference by dust, moisture, etc. Then there is the physical limits to optics. You can only grind a mirror so true. Eventually you arrive at the atomic level and further improvement is impossible.

You totally missed the entire point about the Apollo 13 example. Saying, "Hey, I'm on the moon" is NOT the same thing as the microscope that even a successful flight is under and the excruciating detail being monitored and studied by 1000's of people who know their s**t. Then consider what I described about the Apollo 13 flight. It is the totality of all of that - the science, the engineering, the unexpected events, the intense study and simulation on Earth to understand what was happening up there, the shear impossible-to-fake unpredictability, serendipity, and human behavior and reactions involved in a crisis of such complexity.

Your dismissal of it with this - "Yes, I know your mothers cousin or whatever heard the comm traffic with the capsule, but if I called them on the phone right now and told them I was on the moon would it not be FUNCTIONALLY the same? (lol, Can you hear me now?)" - is asinine in the extreme. He didn't just hear the comm traffic, he was neck deep in the entire problem for 42 straight hours; a problem of such complexity and with so many aspects to it that I feel confident that you cannot conceive of it.

"Your vastly superior intellect and knowledge should be used to educate not insult."

This world is overrun with those who refuse to be educated, insist upon spreading ignorance and misinformation, and they are DANGEROUS. Irrationality breeds irrationality. I've seen this in my own family. Mankind must get beyond irrationality in all its forms, be they religious, quackery, CT'ist, pseudo-science, all the many forms of denialism, etc.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 5:44:24 AM PST
Irish Lace says:
Sorry, hon. I gave that vid 10 full minutes of my short and precious life and saw nothing that even faintly resembled evidence. It's 47 minutes long. At what point does the evidence show up? I'll let it load and just go there.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 5:55:45 AM PST
Ryan Wilson: << it seems odd to me that we have satellites that can read the date off a penny lying on the ground and telescopes that can see 13.7 billion years into the past but we dont seem to have images of the flag/footprints/SIX spacecraft (landers)/3-4 rovers/etc. except those taken by the crews themselves....>>

I'm seconding Kyle here. Every single factual claim in this post is incorrect. Satellite resolution of things on earth is measured in inches. Reading the dates off of pennies requires sub millimeter resolution. Earth orbiting satellites are on the order of 150-300 miles from the Earth's surface. The moon is hundreds of thousands of miles away. Even the very best telescopes on Earth or in Earth orbit are unable to resolve Apollo equipment on the moon - this is sheer fantasy. The images I cited are from a new moon orbiting satellite. On these images detail is visible with better than one foot resolution. For example the Apollo 11 LEM landing pads and footstep disturbed soil are clearly visible. For Iruri to say that this is nothing shows his obvious bias. Then there is the large body of observational and physical evidence previously discussed ad nausium: the lunar material returned which is proven real by comparisons with the Soviet LUNA returned material, the fact that the lunar missions were tracked by other nations including the USSR as well as many amateurs. There has never been a compelling shred of evidence that anything was ever faked.

PS - no one has EVER suggested that any of the landing sites were on the far side of the moon. All the landing sites are public and well known. Mirrors were left for laser reflection experiments and have been used repeatedly - confirming these locations to meter resolution accuracy.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 5:56:19 AM PST
Irish Lace says:
Wow, you do get your back up about uppity women, don't you? Well, you'll just have to get over that, I suppose, or find the "Silent, Subservient Women" forum where women know their "place" and remain respectfully silent or speak only to say, "You're right, sir!"

Oh, and you may rest assured that no one is more pleased than I that you are not married to me!

You know, your thinking pattern is interesting. I use one rather innocuous insult and from that you draw the conclusion that not only am I vulgar, but ALL American women are vulgar and not just vulgar but THE MOST vulgar in the entire world.

Fels Naptha? Seriously? Do they still make that stuff?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 5:59:26 AM PST
Irish Lace says:
"I'm really not sure where I stand on the issue, but..."

You DO know what they say about "everything that comes before the 'but'" don't you?

Posted on Dec 1, 2010 8:27:46 AM PST
Rock Head says:
Regarding the resolution of the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter compared to spy satellites:

The LRO has a small camera lens with a 4 ft resolution at an altitude of 30 miles. The LRO also performs other functions such as laser topographic mapping, radiation, heat measuring and more. It has sensors for all these tasks and weighs only about 1000 kg. The KH-12 spy satellites can afford to have sensors with much higher resolution because they weigh in at almost 20,000 kg. That mass only has to be boosted into a relatively low Earth orbit, while the LRO had to be boosted all the way to the Moon.

Cheers,
Rock Head

Posted on Dec 1, 2010 1:56:03 PM PST
iruri says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 2:25:10 PM PST
Ryan said: ""Your vastly superior intellect and knowledge should be used to educate not insult."

Kyle replied: "This world is overrun with those who refuse to be educated, insist upon spreading ignorance and misinformation, and they are DANGEROUS. Irrationality breeds irrationality. I've seen this in my own family. Mankind must get beyond irrationality in all its forms, be they religious, quackery, CT'ist, pseudo-science, all the many forms of denialism, etc."

-- I don't condone insult very easily if it can be avoided at all. However, moon-landing-denialists and young-earth creationists and the like indeed insist upon spreading ignorance and misinformation. As such, they are extremely harmful and dangerous. I'm also sorely tempted to insult them.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 3:39:30 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 1, 2010 5:01:33 PM PST
iruri says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 4:26:33 PM PST
Ronald Craig says:
"Man Did not, not, not, not, walk on the Moon."

Yeah yeah yeah! (What tune do you sing this to? And is there a dance routine goes with it? Put THAT on YouTube, how about?)

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 5:00:10 PM PST
iruri says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 6:44:39 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 1, 2010 6:46:28 PM PST
@ iruri the infantile -

Another day and two more posts, one a long string of naked assertions of your preconceived conclusion, and one content-free, yet still no response - NOT EVEN AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT - of the questions that you told me to bring on.

Not to mention neither rebuttal nor acknowledgment that, in Josh's words, "Every single factual claim in (Ryan's) post is incorrect."

You know, the post that you praised effusively, proving that in matters related to moon missions, you can't find your ass with both hands and a map.

Yet you were more adamant than ever that you are right.

That's what nutters do.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 6:58:10 PM PST
@ iruri -

Just to make it easy for you, I reproduce the questions here. You do recall requesting me to ask them of you, do you not?:

"kyle, ok, give me the TEST."

I have done so.

For each of the following well known CT's or common beliefs, please indicate by number the answer that best represents your position regarding it:

A - Completely reject
B - Almost certainly false
C - It's possible, but not likely
D - Who knows?
E - Probably true
F - Firmly believe it

The assassination of JFK was the result of a conspiracy that involved . . .

1) _ Fidel Castro
2) _ The Maffia
3) _ Lyndon Johnson
4) _ J. Edgar Hoover
5) _ Russians
6) _ Aliens
7) _ All of the above

The formation of the Federal Reserve Bank system was the result of a conspiracy that involved . . .

8) _ The international Zionist movement
9) _ A secret society of elite East coast power brokers that recruits its members at Ivy League colleges
10) _ The Rothschild family and the governments that do their bidding
11) _ A cabal of wealthy capitalists who want to use the FED to steal everyone else's wealth and destroy the capitalist system
12) _ Communists
13) _ Aliens
14) _ All of the above

The widespread reports of unidentified flying objects and sometimes very specific reports of apparently alien craft and alien visitors are the result of a conspiracy that involves . . .

15) _ The US military
16) _ The US civilian government
17) _ Multiple foreign gov'ts
18) _ Aliens
19) _ All of the above

The age of the Earth is . . .

20) _ ~4.55B yrs
21) _ ~6,000 to 10,000 yrs
22) _ Impossible to determine for lack of evidence

Biological evolution explains . . .

23) _ The fossil record
24) _ Genetic similarities across species
25) _ The origin of humans

26) _ One or more religion has a factual basis regarding its supernatural claims.
27) _ There exists an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal being.
28) _ Said being created the universe.
30) _ Said being created mankind.
31) _ Said being created mankind for very different purposes than any other life.
32) _ Said being listens to, sometimes responds to, and occasionally takes action based upon the requests of humans.

33) _ Homeopathy is valid medical treatment.
34) _ Chiropractors apply sound science.
35) _ Excluding from or including certain specific items in your diet or certain supplements, contrary to the medical community, can have huge effects on the occurrence or progression of many common diseases.
36) _ Genetically engineered crops and livestock are unhealthy to consume.

37) _ Water dowsing works for some people.
38) _ ESP is a real phenomenon.
39) _ Some people can move things or influence events with only their minds.

40) _ Engineering achievements were made decades ago that would easily and cheaply result in cars that get 100 - 200 mpg, but they have been suppressed by threatened business interests.
41) _ You can buy aftermarket add-ons for your motor vehicle that will significantly increase fuel economy without any significant trade-offs in performance.
42) _ The US gov't has knowledge of anti-gravity propulsion technology.

43) _ The US gov't knew the Japanese fleet was going to attack Pearl Harbor.
44) _ The US gov't was involved in the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr.
45) _ The US gov't was involved in the creation of HIV.
46) _ The Bush Administration knew there were no WMD in Iraq.
47) _ Most other gov'ts with significant intelligence capabilities did not believe that Iraq had WMD.
48) _ The official accounts of the 9/11 attacks include enough significant intentional disinformation and exclude enough significant information so as to place the overall conclusions in doubt.
49) _ At least some element of the US gov't knew that the 9/11 attacks were coming.
50) _ At least some element of the US gov't was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 8:01:42 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 1, 2010 8:03:59 PM PST
iruri says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 8:09:37 PM PST
"Maybe look at some of the evidence I've presented, at least try. "

Have you 'looked' at any of the evidence anyone else has presented? Really? I think not.
Prove me wrong.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 8:11:02 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 1, 2010 8:12:45 PM PST
@ iruri -

"Maybe look at some of the evidence I've presented, at least try."

Should he look at it as if it hadn't already been rebutted? You know, with full-tilt bonzo, hysterically blind denialism like you do.

"Or is your Head made up?"

The transference is astounding!

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 9:43:57 PM PST
Irish Lace says:
12:15: There is a Van Allen belt. At least, I THINK that's the "evidence" presented at this time that is "evidence that we didn't go." Interestingly, it was accompanied by pictures of the launch of them actually "going."

Fail.

15:05: President Kennedy pronounced that it was the American goal to go to the moon and do it in full view of the world. I have absolutely NO idea how this constitutes evidence that "we didn't go."

Fail.

27:45: When asked if he could see stars __IN SPITE OF THE GLARE__, Armstrong said no, they couldn't see them _while photographing the suns corona_ without using the optics.

Fail

29:30
Flags "blowing in the wind... at least twice" while it is clear from the video that they flags are moving in direct and specific response to being moved by the astronaut.

Fail.

32:00
This is my favorite. The voiceover tells you what they want you to see as you look at a "clandestine" piece of film which they tell you was shot in July.

Sorry, iruri. If this is your "evidence we didn't go", it fails the smell test and actually contains no evidence, just supposition, speculation and assumptions. And now I am officially dismissing this nonsense as nonsense. Bring me one person... just one ... who admits to participating in this vast, multi-national, 40yo conspiracy. Then we'll talk. Until then... go away.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 9:48:22 PM PST
Irish Lace says:
"Roland, Instead of coming out and Insulting people maybe you might spend a little more time Investigating the Event instead of asking yourself if you should start following Mr Crude in calling people names.
Maybe look at some of the evidence I've presented, at least try.
Or is your Head made up? OK, have it your way, whatever that is. "

Two things:
1. Why do you capitalize words randomly?
2. You really haven't presented any actual empirical evidence. I'm just sayin'.
3. You've steadfastly ignored all evidence presented to the contrary.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 1, 2010 10:11:35 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 1, 2010 10:13:16 PM PST
iruri says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Dec 2, 2010 12:18:50 AM PST
Iruri
"Man Did not, not, not, not, no, no, no, no, no, no, walk on the Moon"
-- And Iruri is not, not, not, not, no, no, no, no, no, no, intelligent. This is not an insult. This is a hypothesis based on observation so far. An alternate theory would state that Iruri suffers from paranoid delusion. As any theory, both can be rejected by facts. Give us some facts so that we may think you are normal and intelligent.
-- To almost all the others, and myself -- why the hell are we losing our time on this guy?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 2, 2010 12:28:09 AM PST
Ronald Craig says:
Didn't you ever poke soft things with a pointy stick when you were a boy, just to hear them cry? ;)
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  219
Total posts:  5480
Initial post:  Nov 23, 2010
Latest post:  Sep 5, 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 9 customers

Search Customer Discussions